Transfer-pricing treatment of ITeS margins excludes pass-through tax recoveries and separate delayed-receivables interest after working-capital adjust...
Capacity-utilisation adjustments under TNMM can neutralise substantiated COVID-related idle costs where underutilisation materially affects profitabil...
TNMM functional comparability requires excluding rice manufacturers from a pure Basmati rice trader's benchmark and recognising operating export recei...
Working-capital adjustment subsumes delayed-receivable effects in TNMM benchmarking of captive software-development services, avoiding separate notion...
Transfer-pricing comparability requires exclusion of financially illogical super-profit comparables and correction of unsupported annual-report and ma...
Charitable character assessment preserves Section 80G approval despite inclusive spiritual teachings and incidental religious expenditure within the s...
Penalty proceedings for cash-loan acceptance require assessment proceedings and recorded Assessing Officer satisfaction; absent these, the proceedings...
Page of 4828
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
161 to 180 of 96556 Results
❮
❯
❯❯
0 / 200
Expand Note
Add to Folder
No Folders have been created
+
Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?
The SC delivered a fragmented verdict on the interplay between Sections 144C and 153 of the Income Tax Act regarding time limits for assessment proceedings. The majority held that the limitation period under Section 153(3) applies to draft assessment orders under Section 144C, rendering assessments time-barred if not completed within that period, thereby upholding the High Court's quashing of final assessments and directing acceptance of the returns filed. However, a dissenting opinion emphasized that Section 144C operates independently and extends beyond the timelines prescribed in Section 153, allowing adequate opportunity for dispute resolution without violating natural justice. Consequently, the SC set aside the High Court's order, allowing the Revenue to pass appropriate orders and permitting the assessee to seek remedies thereafter. Due to divergent views, the SC directed constitution of a larger Bench to reconsider these issues comprehensively.
The SC delivered a fragmented verdict on the interplay between Sections 144C and 153 of the Income Tax Act regarding time limits for assessment proceedings. The majority held that the limitation period under Section 153(3) applies to draft assessment orders under Section 144C, rendering assessments time-barred if not completed within that period, thereby upholding the High Court's quashing of final assessments and directing acceptance of the returns filed. However, a dissenting opinion emphasized that Section 144C operates independently and extends beyond the timelines prescribed in Section 153, allowing adequate opportunity for dispute resolution without violating natural justice. Consequently, the SC set aside the High Court's order, allowing the Revenue to pass appropriate orders and permitting the assessee to seek remedies thereafter. Due to divergent views, the SC directed constitution of a larger Bench to reconsider these issues comprehensively.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.